As the number of criminal cases against the former president continues to rise, he is resorting to a well-known tactic: delaying tactics. This strategy is commonly used by individuals facing legal troubles to prolong the legal process and buy more time. By doing so, the former president hopes to create obstacles for the prosecution and potentially weaken their case.
Stalling in criminal cases can take various forms, such as filing numerous motions, requesting continuances, and challenging evidence. These tactics can slow down the legal proceedings and put pressure on the prosecution to make mistakes or overlook important details. In some cases, stalling can also exhaust the resources of the opposing party and lead to a plea bargain or a reduced sentence.
While stalling tactics can be effective in the short term, they may not always work in the long run. Judges can deny frivolous motions and set deadlines for the legal process to move forward. Additionally, stalling can create a negative perception of the defendant in the eyes of the public and the court.
Overall, stalling in criminal cases is a common strategy employed by defendants to delay the legal process and potentially gain an advantage in their case. However, it is important to weigh the potential benefits against the risks and consequences of such tactics. In the end, the former president’s use of stalling tactics may not be enough to avoid the consequences of his alleged actions.
Source link
